State v. Sewell

{¶ 1} This case is before us on the appeal of Defendant-Appellant, Kenneth Sewell, from his conviction and sentence for robbery, following a bench trial. In support of his appeal, Sewell contends that the court erred in denying his motion for acquittal under Crim.R. 29(A), and that his conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence. Sewell further contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his trial counsel failed to request a bill of particulars and failed to cross-examine a key State witness.

{¶ 2} We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying…